◆ SpookStack

—B- geile whose officers had mot filed mon-Communist affidavits, the lower courts held the affidavit requirenent valid and denied relief. The Supreme Court affirmed judgments, A majority of the court agreed that the requirement | .-ef disclosure ef overt acts of affiliation or membership in the Communist Party did not deny any constitutional rights, but the court appeared to be equally divided with respect to that part of the law requiring disclosure of belief unconnected with any overt act. Osman v. Douds (1950) 339 U.S. 846 . Section 9(b). ef the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, " pertaining to *non-Communi st” affidavit, held valid, in so far as it is . concerned with menbership in, or affiliation with, the Communist Party. With regard to the constitutionality of other parts of the section concerning beliefs of the affidavit, the court was equally divided. Blau v. United States (1950) $40 U.S, 159 A witness cannot be compelled to testify before a grand jury, over a claim ef the privilege against self-iacrimination, concerning his employ- = ment by the Communist Party or knowledge of its eperations. Even if the answers to such questions would not support a conviction for crime, they might furnish a link in the chain of evidence needed for prosecution under the Smith Act. Accordingly, a conviction for refusal to answer such | questions was reversed. a nt Blau v. United States (1951) M0 U.S, 332 . Petitioner, a witness before a federal grand jury, declined to answer questions concerning activities and records of the Communist Party, claiming the privilege against self-incrinination, He also refused to di- | wulge the whereabouts of his wife, asserting a privilege mot to disclose confidential communications between husband and wife, The Supreme Court held